Can we debate theology without resorting to labels?

Sometimes I wonder why anyone would voluntarily participate on a panel to update a church hymnal. Some of the most divisive disagreements I've seen have been over what kind of music is played in the church and what hymns should be included. Don’t mess with someone else’s favorite hymn! So it didn't surprise me to see an article Dave found in The Economist on a “Presbyterian problem” about a song that wasn't included in an upcoming hymnal. A Presbyterian Church (USA) panel decided to leave the song “In Christ Alone” out because of the phrase "till on that Cross as Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied." 

This could be an opportunity to talk about whether God is wrathful or loving or whether God really insisted on sacrificing Jesus to “satisfy” the price of our sins – both are topics we've explored here and here. There’s a lot more debate on “substitutionary atonement” than I ever knew. Instead the article described it as another instance of conservative vs. “soft-minded liberal Christianity.” Never mind that the alternate wording the panel wanted to use – “"…as Jesus died/the love of God was magnified" – already appeared in a recent Baptist hymnal or that the whole issue is more nuanced than a liberal vs. conservative ideological dispute, as this article in Christian Century describes. 

But this isn't about songs in a hymnal. It’s about how labels can too often turn a respectful debate into an us vs. them free-for-all that goes nowhere. Several years ago, Brian McLaren wrote Generous Orthodoxy, a book with the longest subtitle of any on my shelf: “Why I am a missional + evangelical + post/protestant + liberal/conservative + mystical/poetic + biblical + charismatic/contemplative + fundamentalist/Calvinist + Anabaptist/Anglican + Methodist + catholic + green + incarnational + depressed-yet-hopeful + emergent + unfinished Christian.” One of the premises in his book is that people from different theological backgrounds and perspectives each have something to offer in terms of understanding who Jesus is and what it means to live a Christ-centered life. McLaren urges us to look beyond the “us/them” paradigm and consider what it means to live as “we together.” It’s a dialogue some folks are trying to have while others are still debating the title. 

It’s hard to get past the labels because it’s one way we try to make sense of the world. That’s fine as long as we realize that we all are more than a collection of tags that sort us according to sex, age, political affiliation, religious preference, job title, economic status, health, musical and shopping tastes, etc. Sometimes we say or do things that don’t sit well with others. Sometimes we aren't inspired by someone else’s favorite hymn. Sometimes those labels that don’t completely fit us get in the way of having a reasonable, civil debate. Sometimes those labels we try to project onto God and Jesus – labels based on our particular perspectives – get in the way of recognizing that God doesn't actually fit neatly into those tags. And, whether we want to admit it or not, those labels can become baggage that turn some people off from religion and faith. 

Anyone can write a blog to express an opinion (I’m proof of that!). Sometimes it’s easier to frame a mock debate between you and some “soft-minded liberal” or “judgmental fundamentalist” (depending on your perspective). But that’s not the same as listening to what the other person has to say and trying to understand where they are coming from. When we get caught up in debating the stereotypes, we forget that the real people behind those labels are much more complex, interesting, and worthy than the labels make them out to be. 

Rachel Held Evans recently said it well:

The truth is, that dude whose blog posts totally rub you the wrong way may be the best person in the world with which to watch a football game or talk theology over beer. That acquaintance on Facebook whose pictures make her life seem perfect may struggle with self-doubt, depression, and fear. That stuffy Calvinist you love to hate may melt into a goofy, delightful playmate when he’s tickling his kids on the living room floor. The feminist you always imagine shouting other people down may have an unbelievably tender heart.  The pastor you think is always wrong probably gets a few things right. And the pastor you think is always right definitely gets some stuff wrong.

Perhaps the most radical thing we followers of Jesus can do in the information age is treat each other like humans—not heroes, not villains, not avatars, not statuses, not Republicans, not Democrats, not Calvinists, not Emergents—just humans. This wouldn't mean we would stop disagreeing, but I think it would mean we would disagree well.

Maybe one radical way Christianity pulls us up from our messiness isn't whether God’s wrath or God’s love prevails. Instead, through Jesus, God calls us to enter into relationships where all of our labels and pretenses – and the pressure to “fit” into those labels – are stripped away. I’d like to think that God embraces us no matter where we stand in the ideological debate because God transcends those debates. 

The question is, how do we learn to recognize and move beyond those labels we’re so used to using?